News

It is common knowledge among academics that winners of past grants have better odds of winning subsequent grants. But is this just because repeat winners are better scientists or also because they got lucky the first time? In a study recently published in PNAS, Thijs Bol (UvA), Arnout van de Rijt (UU), and Mathijs de Vaan (Berkeley) compared Veni applicants who scored just above the funding threshold with those who received similar scores but fell just below the funding threshold. They found that the barely-over-the-line winners accumulated 180,000 euros more in research funding during the subsequent 8 years than the close-but-no-cigar non-winners, and were 50% more likely to end up as tenured professor. The study received national and international attention in the Volkskrant, Trouw, Science and Nature. You can read the articles here:Volkskrant, Trouw, Science, Nature